2021 Nissan Armada Platinum on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nissan alters all CVTs to act less like a stretched rubberband

Among automotive enthusiasts, no one seems to hold a neutral opinion when it comes to continuously variable transmissions. CVTs are either praised for their ability to boost fuel economy or chided for their occasionally poor driving dynamics. Nissan is among the masters of these un-shifting gearboxes in the US, and it uses them in many vehicles in its lineup. However, for the 2015 model year, several models are getting a software update to make their CVTs a bit more like a conventional automatic.
To give drivers the option of feeling gearshifts while on the road, Nissan is adding its D-Step Shift Logic feature to the CVTs in multiple vehicles. Steve Powers, Nissan's senior manager of powertrain performance, told Autoblog the system forces the transmission to "hold a ratio and then shift" to simulate the way that a traditional automatic would. It's simply a change in software, but the company "can't do it to older CVTs," he said, because it would require changes to transmission logic, as well. According to Automotive News, the upgrade is coming to the 2015 Versa, Versa Note (pictured above), Sentra, V6-equipped Altima, Pathfinder and Quest. "We're rolling it out to all programs," said Powers.
Interestingly, buyer perception appears to be pushing the upgrade. John Curl, a Nissan North America regional product manager, told Automotive News that the decision to add the tech partially comes because some owners are bothered that the CVTs aren't changing gears. According to Powers, D-Step "avoids the rubber band feel," that many drivers didn't like. The different sensation of these transmissions seems like something consumers would notice during the test drive, or that the salesperson would inform them about. The same issue cropped up last year when the company was facing customer satisfaction problems among new buyers customers' unfamiliarity with the gearboxes.

These are your top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012

Despite 2012 being the best year of auto sales this country has seen since 2007, not every vehicle got an equally large share of the sales pie. Some barely got a sliver, as evidenced by this year's list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. We've dug through sales data from every automaker to come up with this year's list and, like last year, we've set some parameters to ensure it includes legitimately bad-selling vehicles. The first parameter is a starting MSRP under $100,000, which automatically excludes what's parked in most one-percenters' garages. We're also excluding vehicles cancelled in 2012, even if they garnered sales through the end of the year while dealerships sold off remaining inventory. This includes models like the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Mercedes-Benz R-Class and last year's worst-seller, the Acura RL. Next, vehicles are considered as they are reported by the automaker, which means that, while sales of the Murano CrossCabriolet were probably low enough to make the list, because Nissan reports only one number for all Murano sales, it was excluded. Cadillac, however, reports sales of the Escalade EXT separately from the Escalade, hence its repeat appearance. Finally, there was the question of whether or not eligibility should be given to Suzuki vehicles, as the brand announced in November that it would end sales in the US as soon as its current inventory ran out. We decided Suzuki vehicles should be included as the brand was offering 2013 models at the time of the announcement, and as far as we can tell, inventory levels remained high enough to satisfy demand through the end of the year. Without further ado, below are the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2012. Top 10 Worst-Selling Vehicles of 2012 10. Volvo C30 MSRP: $25,500 Units Sold: 2,827 Last Year: – 9. BMW Z4 MSRP: $47,350 Units Sold: 2,751 Last Year: – 8. Audi TT MSRP: $39,545 Units Sold: 2,226 Last Year: – 7. Subaru Tribeca MSRP: $32,595 Units Sold: 2,075 Last Year: 10 6. Suzuki Equator MSRP: $19,449 Units Sold: 1,966 Last Year: 7 5. Cadillac Escalade EXT MSRP: $63,060 Units Sold: 1,934 Last Year: 6 4. Nissan GT-R MSRP: $96,820 Units Sold: 1,188 Last Year: – 3. Acura ZDX MSRP: $50,920 Units Sold: 775 Last Year: 4 2. Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback MSRP: $18,495 Units Sold: 702 Last Year: 3 1. Mitsubishi i-MiEV MSRP: $29,125 Units Sold: 588 Last Year: – Want a little more "worst-selling" data? Check out our list of the top 10 worst-selling vehicles of 2011.

DC fast charging not as damaging to EV batteries as expected

As convenient as DC fast charging is, there have been lots of warnings that repeated dumping of so many electrons into an electric vehicle's battery pack in such a short time would reduce the battery's life. While everyone agrees that DC fast charging does have some effect on battery life, it may not be as bad as previously expected. Over on SimanaitisSays, Dennis Simanaitis, writes about a recent presentation by Matt Shirk of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) called DC Fast, Wireless, And Conductive Charging Evaluation Projects (PDF) that describes an ongoing test of four 2012 Nissan Leaf EVs that are being charged in two pairs of two. One pair only recharges from 50-kW DC fast chargers, which the other two sip from 3.3-kW Level 2 chargers exclusively. Otherwise, the cars are operated pretty much the same: climate is automatically set to 72 degrees, are driven on public roads around Phoenix, AZ and have the same set of dedicated drivers is rotated through the four cars. "Degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." What's most interesting are the charts on page seven of Shirk's presentation (click the image above to enlarge), which show the energy capacity of each of the four vehicles. When they were new, the four batteries were each tested to measure their energy capacity and given a 0 capacity loss baseline. They were then tested at 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 miles, and at each point, the DC-only EVs had roughly the same amount of battery loss as the Level 2 test subjects. The DC cars did lose a bit more at each test, but only around a 25-percent overall loss after 40k, compared to 23 percent for the Level 2 cars. Simanaitis' takeaway is that, "INL data suggest that the amount of degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." The tests are part of the INLs' Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity work and a final report is forthcoming. These initial numbers from IPL do mesh with other research into DC fast charging, though. Mitsubishi said daily fast charging wouldn't really hurt the battery in the i-MiEV and MIT tests of a Fisker Karma battery showed just 10-percent loss over 1,500 rapid charge-discharge cycles.